Slower is not always better: response-time evidence clarifies the limited role of miserly information processing in the Cognitive Reflection Test.
AffiliationUniversity of Derby
University of Bedfordshire
University of Central Lancashire
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractWe report a study examining the role of 'cognitive miserliness' as a determinant of poor performance on the standard three-item Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT). The cognitive miserliness hypothesis proposes that people often respond incorrectly on CRT items because of an unwillingness to go beyond default, heuristic processing and invest time and effort in analytic, reflective processing. Our analysis (N = 391) focused on people's response times to CRT items to determine whether predicted associations are evident between miserly thinking and the generation of incorrect, intuitive answers. Evidence indicated only a weak correlation between CRT response times and accuracy. Item-level analyses also failed to demonstrate predicted response-time differences between correct analytic and incorrect intuitive answers for two of the three CRT items. We question whether participants who give incorrect intuitive answers on the CRT can legitimately be termed cognitive misers and whether the three CRT items measure the same general construct.
CitationStupple EJN, Pitchford M, Ball LJ, Hunt TE, Steel R (2017) 'Slower is not always better: response-time evidence clarifies the limited role of miserly information processing in the Cognitive Reflection Test.', PLoS ONE, 12 (11), pp.-.
PublisherPublic Library of Science
PubMed Central IDPMC5669478
The following license files are associated with this item:
- Creative Commons
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Green - can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher's version/PDF
- Is the cognitive reflection test a measure of both reflection and intuition?
- Authors: Pennycook G, Cheyne JA, Koehler DJ, Fugelsang JA
- Issue date: 2016 Mar
- The time course of conflict on the Cognitive Reflection Test.
- Authors: Travers E, Rolison JJ, Feeney A
- Issue date: 2016 May
- The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks.
- Authors: Toplak ME, West RF, Stanovich KE
- Issue date: 2011 Oct
- Evaluating the cognitive reflection test as a measure of intuition/reflection, numeracy, and insight problem solving, and the implications for understanding real-world judgments and beliefs.
- Authors: Patel N, Baker SG, Scherer LD
- Issue date: 2019 Dec
- Effect of response format on cognitive reflection: Validating a two- and four-option multiple choice question version of the Cognitive Reflection Test.
- Authors: Sirota M, Juanchich M
- Issue date: 2018 Dec